Assessment of Fuel Cell Technologies to Address Power Requirements at the Port of Long Beach

Transcription

1 Assessment of Fuel Cell Technologies to Address Power Requirements at the Port of Long Beach FULL REPORT Prepared by Dr. Michael A. MacKinnon Senior Scientist Dr. Scott Samuelsen Professor of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Environmental Engineering Submitted to Port of Long Beach Irvine, California In conjunction with: Contract Number HD-8381, Job Task 1605 June 28, 2016

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Primary Authors of the report would like to acknowledge the following persons that contributed to the report. Project Oversight and Support - Brendan Schaffer: Research Staff Distributed Energy Resource Sizing David White: Graduate Student 1

3 Abstract The Port of Long Beach faces challenges and opportunities in managing and meeting future energy requirements. Fuel cells are emerging as a technology that can facilitate meeting future energy requirements and contributing to Port energy and environmental goals. Power generation can be provided at multiple scales by solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC), molten carbonate, and phosphoric acid fuel cell systems. Additionally, combined cooling, heat, and power applications from the same systems can further enhance environmental and energy benefits and reduce costs. Trigeneration systems that produce on-site hydrogen represent a system and application that can support both Port operations and customer requirements. For vehicle applications, proton exchange fuel cells can be used to power motive applications including cargo-handling equipment (CHE), light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles, and rail switching locomotives. SOFC/Gas Turbine hybrid power blocks are emerging to power medium and long-distance locomotives. Relative to other self-generation technologies, fuel cells have the benefits of zero local pollutant emissions, very low GHG emissions, and virtually net zero water consumption. This report describes the potential application of fuel cells to meet the electric power generation and vehicle power requirements of the Port in the context of high efficiency and environmental sensitivity. The science of fuel cells is presented in a companion supplementary report. 2

4 Contents Nomenclature... 5 Executive Summary Introduction POLB Energy Considerations Configuration of the POLB Electrical System POLB Microgrid Stationary Power Generation Primary Power Generation Back-up and/or Emergency Power Generation Provide Combined Cooling, Heating, and Power Tri-Generation of Electricity, Heat, and Hydrogen Provide Portable Auxiliary Marine Power Motive Power for Transportation Light Duty Vehicles Cargo Handling Equipment Heavy-Duty Vehicles Auxiliary Power Units Summary of POLB Fuel Cell Applications Benefits of Fuel Cell Applications at POLB Area, Required Infrastructure, and Other Considerations Fuel Cell Footprint Required Infrastructure Site Considerations Electrical Infrastructure Natural Gas Infrastructure Hydrogen Infrastructure Operating and Maintenance Fuel Cell Lifetime Fuel Cell Costs Fuel Cells vs. Other Self-generation Devices Self-Generation Devices

5 5.1.1 Reciprocating Engines Gas Turbines Microturbines Steam Turbines Combined Cycle Generation Hybrid Fuel Cell Heat Engine Plants Self-Generation Technology Comparison System Size Emissions Advantages/Disadvantages of Self Generation Devices CCHP at POLB Benefits of CCHP Economic Benefits CCHP Emissions Improved Reliability and Resiliency Opportunities for CCHP at POLB Space Cooling/Heating Industrial Applications Self-generation and CCHP Efficiencies Electrical Efficiencies CCHP Efficiency Power-to-Gas at POLB Power-to-Gas Overview Power-to-Gas at POLB References

6 Nomenclature AB AC AMP APU CA CC CCHP CHP CH CHE CHP CO CPUC DC DG DOE FC FCEV FUE GE GHG GT GW HDV Assembly Bill Alternating Current Auxiliary Marine Power Auxiliary Power Unit California Combined Cycle Combined Cooling, Heating, and Power Combined Heating and Power Cargo Handling Cargo Handling Equipment Combined Heating and Power Carbon Monoxide California Public Utilities Commission Direct Current Distributed Generation U.S. Department of Energy Fuel Cell Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Fuel Utilization Effectiveness General Electric Greenhouse Gas Gas Turbine Gigawatt Heavy Duty Vehicle 5

7 HHV HRSG HVAC KW LCOE LDV LPG MCFC MDV MMBTU MT MW NG NGCC NOx O&M PAFC PEMFC PM POLA POLB PPA PV Higher Heating Value Heat Recovery Steam Generator Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning Kilowatt Levelized Cost of Energy Light Duty Vehicle Liquefied Petroleum Gas Molten Carbonate Fuel Cell Medium Duty Vehicle Million British Thermal Units Microturbine Megawatt Natural Gas Natural Gas Combined Cycle Nitrogen Oxides Operating and Maintenance Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cell Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Particulate Matter Port of Los Angeles Port of Long Beach Power Purchase Agreement Photo Voltaic SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCE Southern California Edison 6

8 SCR SGIP SOx SOFC ST TRU VOC Selective Catalytic Reduction Self-Generation Incentive Program Oxides of Sulfur Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Steam Turbine Transport Refrigerated Units Volatile Organic Compounds 7

9 Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to assess the role of fuel cell technology in addressing future energy requirements at the Port of Long Beach (POLB or Port). Like a heat engine, a fuel cell converts fuel and air into electricity. Unlike a heat engine, a fuel cell converts the chemical energy in a fuel directly into electricity in one step via electrochemical reactions that are similar to those electrochemical reactions occurring in batteries. As a result, fuel cells provide clean, efficient energy conversion and today serve a spectrum of industrial, commercial, and institutional electrical and thermal demands with a wide range of energy, environmental, and economic benefits. The diversity and flexibility of fuel cells yield opportunities to support and enhance operations at POLB, both as stationary and mobile power generators. In particular, the flexibility, modularity and scalability of stationary fuel cell systems yield different options for deployment including reliable, load-following generation to continuously meet a substantial portion of POLB electrical demand. Fuel cells also provide combined cooling, heat, and power (CCHP) opportunities through the cogeneration of high quality heat that can be captured, rather than exhausted, to meet thermal demands including heating or cooling of buildings and warehouses. Tri-generation stationary fuel cell systems produce electricity, heat, and hydrogen. Installation of tri-generation systems at POLB would provide hydrogen in addition to efficient and environmentally sensitive high quality electricity for port loads. The hydrogen could then support hydrogen fuel cell mobile applications including cargo and materials handling equipment (CHE), light- and heavy-duty vehicles, and auxiliary power units. Tri-generation could also serve terminals that receive fuel cell electric vehicles. 8

10 In addition to stationary fuel cell applications, fuel cell engines could provide efficient and zero-emission motive power to many different mobile applications at the POLB including propulsion power for light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles, and various CHE including forklifts. In particular, fuel cells could be used to power forklifts with zero emissions of criteria pollutants and reductions in GHG emissions. The key conclusions of this study are: Stationary fuel cells can provide clean, efficient self-generation to meet primary power for the Port commensurate with POLB environmental and energy goals. Key advantages of fuel cell generation include high efficiencies, virtually zero local emission of pollutants, and reduced emission of greenhouse gases. Tri-generation systems generating electricity, heat, and hydrogen are highly suited for deployment at POLB. Fuel cells in mobile applications can provide clean, highly efficient motive power that contributes to emission reduction goals at POLB. Deployment of fuel cell powered cargo handling equipment, including forklifts, top-picks, side handlers, and rubber-tired gantry cranes, should be considered at POLB. A key opportunity and challenge for CCHP at POLB will be identifying appropriate thermal loads that can utilize generated waste heat. In the absence of thermal loads, high-efficiency electric-only fuel cells are available. In the absence of CCHP opportunities, perfectly suited electric only fuel cell product is emerging with remarkably high efficiency. 9

11 1 Introduction The purpose of this report is to assess the role of fuel cell technology in addressing future energy requirements at the Port of Long Beach (POLB or Port). A fuel cell is a power generator, similar to a gas turbine or diesel engine. Rather than using combustion to drive a turbine or push a piston, a fuel cell converts the chemical energy in a fuel directly into electricity via electrochemical reactions that are similar to those electrochemical reactions occurring in batteries. The key difference between fuel cells and batteries is that fuel cells operate on an external fuel source rather than stored chemical reactants. Thus, fuel cells do not run down or require charging and will continuously provide electricity as long as fuel is provided in the same manner as heat engines. In contrast to combustion engines, fuel cells provide clean, efficient energy conversion in many different industries and applications with a wide range of energy, environmental, and economic benefits. Figure 1: Overview of fuel cell technology. A Doosan PureCell is shown as an example only. Fuel cells produce electricity, heat, and hydrogen effectively for a diverse range of consumer applications. Fuel cells avoid many of the problems associated with combustion - including the inefficiencies and high pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) 10

12 emissions that are typical of combustion heat engines. Despite the many different fuel cell types and configurations, collective benefits of fuel cell systems include operation with high electrical efficiencies (potentially greater than 60%) [1, 2], emission of virtually zero local pollutants (Figure 3), low GHG emissions (Figure 4) 1 [3], consumption of virtually zero to net negative water, a high degree of flexibility and modularity with regards to fuel choice, system sizing, and siting which broadens the scope of potential applications, and acoustically benign operation. Fuel cells operate on both hydrocarbon and renewable fuels including natural gas, biogas, and renewable hydrogen. (A detailed overview of fuel cell technologies is provided in a companion report.) Figure 2: Overview of fuel cells including fuel sources, conversion products, and applications 1 CO2 emissions from fuel cells operating on natural gas without CCHP exceed the CA grid (Total) CO2 emissions, and are lower than the CA grid (Total) CO2 emissions with CCHP. 11

13 g/kwh NOx SO2 CA Grid Fuel Cell Figure 3: Comparison of nitrogen oxide (NO x ) and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) emissions from the CA electrical grid [4] and fuel cells [5] gco 2 /kwh CA Grid (Total) 200 SCE (2014) Figure 4: Comparison of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions from the CA electrical grid [4] and various types of fuel cells [5] including Proton Exchange Membrane (PEMFC), Solid Oxide (SOFC), Molten Carbonate (MCFC), and Phosphoric Acid (PAFC). 12

14 1.1 POLB Energy Considerations Energy management is a fundamental tenant for the continued growth and success of POLB as a cornerstone of the U.S. and California economies. POLB faces fundamental challenges in managing its electricity and energy consumption in coming decades due to a range of economic, technological, environmental and regulatory issues. Currently the exclusive supplier of electricity to POLB and its tenants is the utility grid operated by Southern California Edison (SCE). Electricity consumption and associated costs at POLB are estimated in 2011 to be 150, ,000 MWh at a price of roughly $20 million [6]. Further, electricity use at POLB is projected to quadruple by in response to various factors including growth, terminal automation, and increasing electrification of port technologies (e.g., ship-to-shore power and battery electric cargo handling equipment) in response to operational, regulatory, and environmental drivers [6]. The increase in electricity demand could exacerbate existing concerns regarding the reliability, resiliency, and quality of POLB power supply due to the aging national and regional electrical grids that currently provide electricity. An example of outages due to unreliable and insufficient infrastructure include the 2003 Northeastern U.S. blackout [7]. Electrical grids are vulnerable to disruption from natural disasters such as the large scale outage events following Superstorm Sandy and Tropical Storm Irene [8], sabotage or malfeasance such as the attack on the San Jose area Metcalf substation 3. Maintaining a reliable and resilient supply of high quality power is essential for POLB due to the significant economic damages that can occur from disruption. For example, it is estimated that frequency or voltage variation can interrupt wharf crane operation

15 and result in $75,000 in costs for the first hour of delay [6]. Complete outages could be even more harmful with costs to the U.S. economy potentially reaching $150 million per day for POLA and POLB [6]. Therefore, as terminal operation becomes more automated and technologies at POLB become increasingly electrified, the ability to secure reliable, resilient, and high quality electricity will be imperative. A central driver of POLB energy management strategies is the need to reduce the impacts on the environment and human health. These include a commitment to reduce GHG through its Green Port initiative. 4 Additionally, POLB is committed to reducing harmful impacts on air quality from emissions of pollutants including NOx, PM, and SOx. Under the Clean Air Action Plan, POLB and the POLA seek to reduce diesel PM by 72%, NOx by 22%, and SOx by 93% below 2005 levels by 2020 [9]. To reduce air emissions, electrification strategies are being instituted including the California Air Resources Board s mandate for shore power (or equivalent) for 80% of vessel calls by 2020; electrification of cargo handling equipment; and the procurement of renewable electricity. Additionally, strategies to improve operational efficiencies will lead to lower emissions and costs moving forward Configuration of the POLB Electrical System Figure 5 displays the current structure of the POLB electrical system. The configuration relates to its operational structure as a parent organization (POLB) managing a collection of individual tenants (the 22 comprised terminals). Each terminal is leased from the POLB and operated by a distinct company with different cargoes handled, berth specifications, special equipment. As the parent organization, POLB has SCE meters servicing various loads (e.g., pumping stations, sewer stations or buildings, irrigation, traffic signals, streetlights pedestals) separate from the individual terminals

16 The major container terminals are fed from one or more SCE circuits, each with separate SCE utility meters, and represent an individual microgrid with a collection of electrical loads needed to support operations (e.g., wharf cranes, high-mast lighting, and buildings). Therefore, in Figure 5, the meter in line with the infrastructure associated with Terminal A would be managed between the operators of Terminal A and SCE not the POLB. Similarly, the meter servicing the POLB electrical infrastructure would be managed between the POLB and SCE as a separate customer. It follows then that downstream of the meter, either the tenant or the Port maintains the electrical infrastructure. Figure 5: Basic overview of the electrical grid configuration at POLB While this is the infrastructure today, alternative infrastructures may evolve in the future. For example, the Port itself could evolve to become a master microgrid with the terminals operating as nanogrids and interacting with each other and Port resources to assure high reliability and resiliency in the context of environmental sensitivity and low operating costs. 15

17 1.1.2 POLB Microgrid The development of a microgrid structure has been identified as a key strategy for achieving many POLB goals for energy management including security, sustainability, and resiliency. Microgrids can be defined as stand-alone energy networks comprising different electricity sources (i.e., DG, energy storage) and loads that can operate synchronously with the traditional centralized grid (i.e., utility grid) or disconnect and function autonomously (i.e., island). The importance of establishing a microgrid infrastructure to manage future POLB energy needs is reflected in the vision for the Port s power plan as an Energy Island. 5 Benefits of using a microgrid approach to port energy management 6 include the ability to: Protect critical Port infrastructure from power loss Sustain POLB operations during grid outages Facilitate integration of renewable energy and distributed generation Manage installation electrical power and consumption efficiency 1.2 Stationary Power Generation A primary application of stationary fuel cells at POLB is to provide distributed self-generation that can assist in meeting required electricity loads with high efficiency and very low emissions and water consumption. The flexibility, modularity and scalability of fuel cell systems yield many different opportunities at POLB including generation to fill primary, backup, emergency, or auxiliary load demands. Fuel cells with potential application at POLB include phosphoric acid fuel cells (PAFCs), molten carbonate fuel cells (MCFCs), and solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) for electric power generation and additional benefits including CCHP and hydrogen fuel production. Fuel cell systems could be installed ranging in scale from kilowatts to multi-megawatts

18 depending on the goals of the system in relation to the POLB load. Fuel cell installation at POLB could comprise single stand-alone units to provide backup or emergency power to small loads (e.g., building) or larger multi-unit systems that provide baseload power and are integrated with the utility grid, CCHP, energy storage, hydrogen fueling stations, and energy management strategies. The modularity and scalability of fuel cells is important given the structure of the POLB microgrid with the individual tenants responsible for their own electricity consumption. Deploying fuel cells allows the individual terminals to size systems to best meet their needs and would provide benefits including better control for islanding and ensured power quality. Table 1: Benefits of utilizing stationary fuel cells at POLB. Adapted from [10]. Benefits of Stationary Fuel Cells at POLB Provide primary or backup/emergency power generation Operate connected or independent from utility grid Provide high quality, reliable power High electrical and system (thermal, fuel) efficiencies Near-zero emissions even if operating on natural gas Fuel flexible including conventional and renewable fuels Very low to potentially net negative water consumption Lightweight and quiet Modular and scalable to meet a range of needs and sizes Primary Power Generation Fuel cells can provide continuous clean, reliable generation to help meet a portion of POLB electrical demand during normal day-to-day operations. Fuel cell generation can support different POLB electrical loads including shore-side power for ocean going vessels, cranes, electric cargo handling equipment and battery exchange facilities, reefer units, office buildings, warehouses, tele-communications systems, and security operations. This would allow POLB to offset a portion of its electricity purchased from SCE, improve reliability and resiliency, potentially assist in reducing costs, and provide the capability to island in the event of a utility grid outage. The use 17

19 of fuel cell generation would also allow POLB to better manage balancing electricity demand and generation, maintain appropriate frequency and voltage range, and ensure high power quality. Figure 6 shows an overview of a fuel cell system providing primary generation to support the POLB terminal operations in conjunction with imported power from the SCE grid. Figure 6: Provision of primary power generation by fuel cell systems to support terminal operations at the POLB There are numerous successful commercial fuel cell deployments providing primary power in applications similar to those for the POLB. A large FedEx Express hub in Oakland, California that operates around the clock is equipped with a 500 kw installation of Bloom Energy SOFCs on natural gas [10]. In 2014, the fuel cell installation, in concert with an on-site solar energy, met 44% of the facility s power demand with clean electricity. Similarly, a FedEx Ground facility in Rialto, California uses a 400-kW Bloom Energy fuel cell to meet ~33% of its electricity and represents one of the company s most energy-efficient hubs [10]. Many additional examples of commercial fuel cell generation for primary power needs can be found in References [10] and [11], including the use of fuel cells to provide 40-60% of individual Walmart store s electricity demand, 20% of an IBM data center electrical needs, and 85% of the Panasonic Avionics global headquarters campus needs. 18

20 1.2.2 Back-up and/or Emergency Power Generation Fuel cells are particularly suited for providing back-up power generation in the event of utility grid outages. Should POLB require, stationary fuel cells can seamlessly island (separate from the SCE grid network), support critical loads, and thereby allow continued operations without interruption. Islanding could occur (1) on demand which can be requested by SCE to relieve grid transmission congestions, generation shortages, additional supply/demand challenges, (2) in the event of a fault on the utility grid including unplanned outages, and (3) upon loss or lowering of voltage on the utility grid. The flexibility of fuel cells also allows them to assist in resynchronization and reconnection with the utility grid when required (e.g., post-outage, return of frequency and voltage to acceptable ranges). Figure 7 shows the fuel cell system supporting critical loads at the various terminals during a grid disruption event. Figure 7: Provision of backup power generation by fuel cell systems to support terminal operations at the POLB Fuel cell installations can be sized to meet specific needs of container terminals in maintenance of critical loads, e.g., fuel cell systems installed to backup an array of wharf cranes to provide power and help maintain appropriate power quality in the event of disruptions in grid supplied electricity. Fuel cells can efficiently operate on 19

21 hydrogen or natural gas for days to weeks at a time which reduces the amount of fuel delivery required for diesel or propane generators or battery replacement. Fuel cells are currently deployed commercially in many different roles to provide backup and emergency generation when needed. During Hurricane Irene, a Whole Foods in Glastonbury, Connecticut was able to maintain operating coolers with a 200- kw fuel cell system [12]. An Apple icloud data center in Maiden, North Carolina receives 10 MW from 24 Bloom Energy fuel cells including some operation on renewable fuels [12]. The Beacon Capital Partners property in Manhattan installed a 400-kW Doosan Fuel Cell America fuel cell to provide 20% of the buildings electricity and 50% of its hot water [10]. Additionally, the system is configured to provide backup power to a section of the building to provide a shelter in emergencies and power the outdoor news ticker to provide important public service announcements. St. Francis Hospital in Hartford, Connecticut has two fuel cells installed including a 400-kW system that backs up the operating room and buildings air conditioning system and a 400-kW system to meet 50% of a campus building s electrical demand [12] Provide Combined Cooling, Heating, and Power The use of distributed stationary fuel cells would also allow POLB to pursue CCHP opportunities through the cogeneration heat along with electricity. The thermal energy produced during the fuel cell generation process could be captured and utilized to meet thermal demands at the Port including the space heating or cooling of buildings and warehouses. An additional use of waste heat could include process heat for industries situated near the Port (e.g., large refinery complexes) although these opportunities need to be explored as little is known regarding the feasibility. The use of CCHP systems for self-generation will achieve many benefits in line with POLB energy 20

22 goals including reductions in cost and emissions and improvements in energy efficiency. Stationary power fuel cell systems have been used successfully in many commercial CCHP applications. A Pepperidge Farm plant in Bloomfield, Connecticut installed a 250-kW and 1.2-MW FuelCell Energy fuel cell in 2006 and 2008 and plan to add a 1.4-MW system in 2016 that, in combination with an on-site solar array, will meet nearly the entire energy demand of the facility [10]. The fuel cell systems will enable CCHP applications including the recovery of heat to generate steam for baking processes, the preheating of supply air for the thermal oxidizer used for odor destruction, and the assist the operation of an ammonia-based chilling system. Many additional examples can be found in Reference [10] Tri-Generation of Electricity, Heat, and Hydrogen Installation of tri-generation systems at POLB would provide an efficient and low emitting source of high quality electricity for port loads (Figure 8). Additionally, waste heat could be recovered and utilized for thermal loads (as discussed in the CCHP section) and produced hydrogen could be compressed to provide on-site fueling for hydrogen fuel cell mobile applications including CHE, light- and heavy-duty vehicles, and auxiliary power units (APUs) that provide energy for functions other than propulsion, e.g., to power refrigerated train cars. In particular, tri-generation systems could be highly suitable for terminals that receive automobiles as the increase in the commercial fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) market could create a demand for hydrogen fueling on-site. 21

23 Figure 8: Overview of potential tri-generation applications at POLB Deploying renewable resources is important for POLB to reduce the environmental impacts and improve the sustainability of port operations. Potential opportunities for on-site renewable generation include wind, solar, and geothermal resources. Fuel cell electric power generation can balance intermittencies and improve the performance of on-site PV and reduce costs. Additionally, the use of fuel cells and renewable fuels represents a direct pathway for 100% renewable operation at POLB with virtually zero emission of criteria pollutants. Therefore, fuel cell generation can assist POLB in securing energy from renewable resources by two key mechanisms. First, fuel cells generation can be directly renewable when biogas or renewable hydrogen is utilized as a fuel. Second, integration of on-site photo voltaic panels or wind or geothermal generation with fuel cell systems and potentially battery energy storage systems can provide load following complementary generation required to balance POLB loads with intermittent generation. Additionally, electrification of CHE at POLB will increase in coming years through projects such as the Middle Harbor Redevelopment and future marine terminal 22

24 improvements. 7 A component of electrification includes the construction and operation of exchange facilities to meet the battery charging needs of technologies such as automated guided vehicles. A potentially effective system to maximize benefits of onsite solar PV would be the incorporation of battery exchange facilities with fuel cells as they can provide complementary generation to balance solar resource intermittencies to ensure 24/7 availability of charged batteries for electrified CHE or other loads (Figure 9). The battery system could also provide support to the POLB microgrid or SCE utility grid if needed. Figure 9: Potential integration of fuel cell, solar P.V. and battery system to support POLB electric loads Provide Portable Auxiliary Marine Power The application of barge-mounted fuel cell systems to provide auxiliary marine power for ocean going vessels has the potential to reduce emissions and fossil fuel use of maritime vessels at POLB. In contrast to shore-based electric power, a barge mounted fuel cell system provides flexibility and could provide power for ships at anchorage but not at-berth. A conceptual design of a proton exchange membrane fuel

25 cell (PEMFC) system was found to be technically feasible in several configurations to meet different power levels and run times [13]. The authors estimate that to supply an average container ship 1.4 MW for 48 hours would require four 40-ft containers including two for the system and two for hydrogen storage that could readily be installed on a flat-top barge. While this study evaluated PEMFC application which limited fueling options to gaseous or liquid hydrogen, future application of high temperature fuel cells (e.g., SOFCs, MCFCs) could allow for operation on natural gas and potentially liquefied natural gas. 1.3 Motive Power for Transportation In addition to stationary fuel cell applications, mobile applications for fuel cells also exist at POLB with high energy and environmental benefits. PEMFCs are today the engine of choice for the commercialization of fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) by entities such as Hyundai, Toyota, and Honda. The same engine could provide efficient and zero-emission motive power to many different mobile technologies at the Port including light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles, and various cargo and materials handling equipment including forklifts. Additionally, various fuel cell types could be used as APU for heavy-duty trucks or refrigeration units. Currently, POLB is working with the California Air Resources Board, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and vehicle manufacturers to test emerging FCEV technologies through grants and the Port s Technology Advancement Program Light Duty Vehicles The increased use of light duty vehicles powered by fuel cells is being encouraged in California through State initiatives and regulations including the Zero 24

26 Emissions Vehicle action plan 8 and funding for a network of hydrogen fueling stations. 9 FCEVs could be used at the POLB by Port and container terminal staff as personal vehicles or onsite transportation. This would reduce emissions of GHG and pollutants and improve efficiencies from current gasoline and diesel-fuel vehicles. An additional consideration of FCEV deployment in California with implications for POLB is that the shipping of FCEVs to the U.S. on ocean going vessels will result in increased throughput of FCEVs being handled at the POLB. When FCEVs arrive at POLB, a source of hydrogen is needed for vehicle fueling to facilitate the logistics of storage and distribution to retail locations. This need could be met by on-site refueling with hydrogen provided by tri-generation systems (see Section 2.2.4) that are also providing clean power and heat to the container terminal operations with high efficiencies and very low emissions Cargo Handling Equipment Fuel cells could be used to efficiently power CHE at POLB with zero local emissions of criteria pollutants (Table 2). Currently, fuel cell-powered forklifts are commercially available and have achieved success in the materials handling industry in North America, totaling 7,500 units operating within 60 warehouses and distribution centers in 20 states and Canada [11]. Fuel cell forklifts are particularly suited for high throughput warehouses and distribution centers with similar demands as CHE at POLB (e.g., long shifts, satisfactory operation during all weather conditions). Fuel cellpowered fork lifts, as well as other CHE such as top-picks, side handlers, and rubber tired gantry cranes, can improve POLB operational efficiencies by completing a 6 to 8 hour shift on a single tank of hydrogen while delivering constant power free of voltage

27 sag [14]. Fuel cell CHE also have benefits over electric battery powered CHE including easy and rapid refueling by the operator which negates the need for dedicated staff to perform battery swaps and recharge. Additionally, the avoidance of batteries and associated activities can free up terminal space and prevent the need for handling and disposal of toxic lead acid batteries. Table 2: Benefits of utilizing fuel cell powered cargo handling equipment at POLB. Adapted from [10]. Benefits of Fuel Cell Cargo Handling Equipment at POLB Zero emissions Consistent power for the entirety of shifts Reliable performance in all weather conditions Quick and simple refueling Elimination of batteries and charging infrastructure All above increase productivity and reduce costs Furthermore, the replacement of current CHE technologies at POLB with fuel cell powered CHE would achieve significant reduction in GHG and pollutant emissions. According to the 2014 Air Emissions Inventory, the POLB has 231 forklifts in operation with diesel (100) and propane (108) being the most common technologies [15]. Shown in Table 3, in 2014 forklifts at the POLB emitted 1,881 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), 16 tons of NOx, 0.3 tons of diesel PM, and 22.3 tons of CO [15]. As fuel cell forklifts operate with negligible emissions, deploying them at POLB would achieve complete reductions of direct on-site pollutant emissions. It must be considered that hydrogen production has emissions that vary with respect to pathways, but if high efficiency/low emitting pathways like tri-generation are used GHG emissions will also be significantly reduced. Additionally, emission reductions from forklifts will become more important as cargo throughput at POLB increases to meet future demands. Table 3: 2014 Forklift Data for POLB including number, hours of operation, and emissions. From [15]. Fuel Number Annual Operating Hours CO 2 e (metric tons) NO x (tons) Diesel PM (tons) CO (tons) 26

28 (Avg.) Diesel , Propane Gasoline Electric Additional examples of fuel cells for motive power in specialty applications include tow tractors for use in ground support applications at airports. 10,11 While not currently commercially available, fuel cells are suitable for the various additional CHE equipment in use at POLB including side handlers, top handlers, yard tractors and sweepers. Potential future applications of fuel cell technologies may include integration of motive power into these forms of CHE and their deployment at POLB would achieve similar benefits as discussed for forklifts. It would be beneficial for POLB to consider this possibility in the planning and design of future infrastructure to support the hydrogen fueling of CHE and other mobile applications Heavy-Duty Vehicles Fuel cell powered heavy-duty vehicles represent a potential future application at POLB that would provide high emissions and efficiency benefits relative to the current diesel truck fleet. Currently, heavy-duty FCEV or battery electric heavy-duty vehicles with fuel cell range extenders are largely in the demonstration stages, including at POLB, for commercial applications. 12 Recent demonstrations for heavy-duty FCEVs include transit buses, shuttle buses, refuse trucks, drayage trucks, and delivery vehicles. The California Air Resources Board believes that fuel cell technologies are a principal approach to reach zero and near-zero application in the heaviest vehicle classes including line haul trucks [16]. With similar respect to CHE, it may be valuable for Two early commercial model fuel cell electric transit buses are available 27

29 POLB to consider hydrogen fueling for heavy-duty FCEVs moving forward in the design of energy management strategies Auxiliary Power Units An additional application for fuel cells at POLB is to power APUs for trucking, rail, and marine applications. APUs provide power for functions other than propulsion and typically include an internal combustion engine. A key application for APUs on commercial heavy-duty trucks is to provide power for transport refrigeration units (TRU) and to provide climate control, light, and power in place of idling main propulsion engines. 13 The most common APUs for commercial trucks are small diesel powered engines which have emissions of GHG and criteria pollutants. Use of fuel cell powered APUs at POLB would dramatically reduce emissions, noise, fuel consumption, and size relative to conventional APU relying on internal combustion engines [17]. A fuel cell APU operating on diesel fuel was able to provide power for electronics and air conditioning in long haul trucks under simulated idling conditions Summary of POLB Fuel Cell Applications Table 4 provides a summary of potential fuel cell types and benefits for application at POLB. The diverse capabilities of fuel cells provide many opportunities for deployment at POLB. Power generation can be provided at multiple scales by SOFC, MCFC and PAFC systems to assist in meeting POLB electrical loads with high environmental, energy, and additional benefits. Additionally, CCHP applications are possible from the same systems which can further enhance benefits and reduce costs. Tri-generation systems producing hydrogen are also possible and represent the system/application with the highest efficiency and environmental benefits

30 Additionally, PEMFCs can be used to power motive applications including CHE, light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles, and rail switchers. SOFC/Gas Turbine hybrid systems are being developed for medium and long haul rail. Various fuel cell types could also be used in APU for mobile sources. An overview of potential fuel cell applications at the POLB is shown in Figure 10. Installation of fuel cells for stationary power can provide highly efficient, zero local pollutant emitting generation to meet electricity loads from wharf cranes, AMP, lighting, refrigeration containers, buildings, warehouses, and other miscellaneous loads. Additionally, generation can be used to balance on-site renewable resources via complementary generation both with and without the presence of a battery storage system that, if present, could also be used to meet needs of electrified CHE. If CCHP is utilized, heat generated by a high temperature fuel cell could be used to meet thermal loads of buildings and warehouses. If a tri-generation system is installed at POLB, the hydrogen generated could be used to fuel mobile applications including fuel cell electric CHE, heavy-duty vehicle and rail applications, and fueling for light duty vehicles both operated at POLB and arriving via ship. Table 4: Potential fuel cell applications and benefits at POLB Fuel Cell Type SOFC, MCFC, PAFC PEMFC Potential POLB Applications Provide electricity that can meet all or a portion of POLB primary, backup, and/or emergency load requirements Provide useful waste heat that can generate heating, cooling, or steam for POLB or industrial needs Provide H 2 to support mobile applications at POLB Power APU for motive applications Provide motive power for CHE, LDV, MDV, HDV, and rail POLB Benefits Reduce local emissions Increase resiliency and reliability Increase security Provide ancillary services Reduce noise Significantly reduce local emissions Reduce fuel consumption Reduce noise Improve efficiencies 29

31 2 Benefits of Fuel Cell Applications at POLB The use of stationary fuel cells to generate electricity, heat, and hydrogen at POLB can result in energy and environmental benefits. So would replacing internal combustion engines with fuel cell electric drivetrains utilizing hydrogen in mobile applications. The following section provides a review of some of the key benefits of utilizing fuel cell technology in POLB applications. Directly Support POLB Energy Island Initiative The deployment of fuel cell technologies for self-generation will support the development and operation of a microgrid at POLB. A key goal of the POLB Energy Island Initiative is to procure sufficient local (on-site) generation to meet critical loads during periods of islanding. Fuel cells represent a distributed energy resource that can effectively provide needed on-site generation. In addition, fuel cells in stationary and mobile applications have many energy and environmental benefits that can directly contribute towards the five goals established by POLB under its Energy Island Initiative. Advance green power Fuel cells can be operated on renewable fuels including on-site or directed biogas and renewable hydrogen to provide self-generation with very low, zero, or even net negative GHG emissions. In the long term, the POLB could consider implementing anaerobic digestion onsite, if adequate land could be dedicated to this purpose, while pursuing the use of directed biogas in the short-term. Additionally, the ability of fuel cells to effectively load follow would allow the Port to support both onsite renewable power (e.g., solar photovoltaic panels, battery energy storage systems) and the large scale integration of renewables into the utility grid and provide ancillary services to SCE. 30

32 Use self-generated, distributed power with microgrid connectivity Fuel cells directly encompass this goal as a source of very clean and efficient 24/7 self-generated power at the distributed scale with high suitability for microgrid application. Fuel cells can provide POLB with generation to meet primary electricity loads and remain on-line in the event of a utility grid outage. Additionally fuel cells are an effective component of microgrids with many associated energy and environmental benefits. Provide cost-effective alternative fueling options Fuel cell systems can be installed to provide on-site hydrogen generation in tandem with power and heat. While the electric generation will support electric vehicle charging, the hydrogen generated can be used for many different applications at the port including powering fuel cell electric mobile technologies including automobiles; CHE; and APU for ships, heavy-duty trucks and equipment, and trains. Hydrogen production from such systems enable high efficiencies, very low emissions, and cost effectiveness. Improve energy-related operational efficiencies Fuel cells can contribute to improving the energy efficiency of POLB in many ways. While being themselves highly energy efficient, control strategies can be applied to fuel cell operations that maximize generation in terms of operations to improve system-wide efficiencies. Fuel cells can support and enhance the operation of other resources in POLB microgrid including electric and hydrogen powered CHE, battery systems, and renewable resources. For example, the rapid refueling of hydrogen CHE relative to extended battery charging times for all electric equipment could reduce equipment refueling periods. Additionally, the flexibility and scalability of fuel cells 31

33 will allow them to support the upgrading and operation of equipment and consumption controls. Increase Green Port visibility for POLB Fuel cell installation at a major shipping port would represent a first of its kind technological breakthrough and would provide a showcase for the POLB as a leader in the use of sustainable, advanced technologies, and complement the electrification and automation advancements currently underway at the Middle Harbor Container Terminal. Increase Energy Efficiency at POLB The high energy efficiencies inherent in fuel cells from both an electrical and CCHP perspective will assist in improving the overall energy efficiency of POLB operations. If hydrogen production is included via tri-generation energy efficiencies can increase even further. For example, using fuel cell powered CHE in place of diesel equipment will reduce the amount of energy needed to conduct Port operations by significantly increasing the propulsion efficiency of equipment. Benefits of using highly efficient fuel cell systems include reducing fuel consumption, emissions and costs which can assist POLB in meeting its energy management and environmental goals. Improve Resiliency, Reliability, and Security of POLB Energy Supply The reliability of energy supply describes the availability of high-quality consistent electricity that entirely meets predicted demands at frequencies and voltages within tolerances of the equipment requiring it. The resiliency of energy supply is the ability to resist, absorb, recover from, or successfully adapt to adversity or a change in conditions. Specifically, energy resiliency at the POLB relates to the ability to maintain commercial operations during an unscheduled power outage or to recover rapidly after 32

34 a catastrophic event including natural or manmade disasters. Both resiliency and reliability in the POLB energy supply are essential for ensuring uninterrupted operations at POLB which itself is vital for the economic health of Southern California. Fuel cells in stationary power applications can increase the resiliency and reliability of energy supply at the POLB by providing high quality, 24/7 generation for day to day needs and during periods of outages or low power quality. Fuel cells can be configured to operate independent from the central electrical grid and thus provide emergency power during periods of grid outage. Further, deploying fuel cells will reduce POLB s reliance on high voltage power generation which can be vulnerable to outages and natural disasters. Reduce Pollutant Emissions and Improve Regional Air Quality POLB is located in the South Coast Air Basin of southern California which experiences high levels of health damaging air pollution (also termed air quality). The POLB is committed to reducing the air quality impacts of Port operations through various programs including the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan 15 and the Green Port Policy. 16 Fuel cells produce virtually zero local emissions of air pollutants while operating. Thus, deployment of stationary fuel cell systems provides a means of distributed self-generation for the POLB without the addition of emissions to operations. This is a key benefit of fuel cells as other methods of combustion-driven self-generation (e.g., natural gas turbines, reciprocating engines) have pollutant emissions which incur air quality and permitting challenges. The use of fuel cells for stationary power provides a path for the POLB to secure its energy island future while minimizing criteria pollutant emissions. Additionally, replacing mobile technologies at

35 POLB with fuel cell powered equipment provides a significant reduction in criteria pollutant emissions, particularly if replaced equipment operates on distillate fuels. Therefore, the use of fuel cells at POLB will reduce local criteria pollutant emissions and provide improvements in regional air quality with health benefits to disadvantaged communities in the surrounding area. Specifically, reductions in pollutants will assist the POLB in meeting goals established under the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan and the Green Port Policy. Support California s GHG Goals under AB 32 California has committed to significantly reducing GHG emissions through various policies including the Renewable Portfolio Standard and Assembly Bill 32. As with criteria pollutants, fuel cells emit less GHG than similar self-generation technologies even when operating on natural gas. Additionally, fuel cell powered mobile applications will substantially reduce GHG from existing strategies. Therefore, the use of fuel cells can help reduce POLB carbon footprint and support California s long-term GHG goals. Provide Beneficial Grid Support and Ancillary Services A wide range of grid support and ancillary services can be attained through fuel cell deployment in stationary applications at POLB. Power quality can be maintained and improved via the power conditioning inverters in fuel cell systems for system power factor correction and voltage support. This is important at POLB as disruptions in power quality can cause essential technologies (e.g., wharf cranes, automatic stacking cranes) to experience downtime. The potential mechanisms for support of the regional utility grid by fuel cells discussed in Section 1 could be used to support the SCE electrical grid. POLB fuel cell 34

36 systems can deliver peaking or intermediate load service which can prevent the need for new transmission and distribution infrastructure in southern California and provide peaking capacity in constrained areas in the Southern California Edison grid. Fuel cells can also provide various load shifting services that could benefit POLB including peak shaving and off-peak charging by delivering on-site generation to offset costly electricity during periods of peak-load. As the primary driver is reducing cost, low equipment cost and high reliability are preferred and reciprocating engines are often utilized in peak shaving applications. However, relatively high pollutant emissions from reciprocating engines could prevent project siting and permitting at POLB. Fuel cells avoid this barrier by providing peak shaving in addition to other functions including standby power with very low emissions. And natural gas powered fuel cells are waived from permitting in the South Coast Air Basin. Support and Enhance POLB s Leadership as an Environmental Steward and Green Port POLB is committed to expanding its sustainability and environmental stewardship and has a reputation as being the number one green port in the U.S. This is evident through various Port policies and programs including the Green Port Policy and the Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project. The use of fuel cells at POLB would champion the deployment of advanced sustainable technology with very high environmental benefits that would serve as a model for ports around the world. By demonstrating the use of fuel cells to provide clean, efficient, 24/7 renewable energy for operations POLB will bolster its reputation as a world-leader in sustainable operations. 35

37 3 Area, Required Infrastructure, and Other Considerations 3.1 Fuel Cell Footprint The required area for fuel cell systems (including the fuel cell power system and any required balance of plant) varies with respect to specific technologies but is generally modest and amenable to distributed generation applications. For example, a 2.8 MW scalable MCFC system requires roughly one quarter of an acre in total footprint a four-unit 11.2 MW installation providing power in South Korea occupies approximately an acre of land. 17 Similarly, a scalable 440 kw PAFC system including a power and cooling module can be combined to reach 2.4 MW (six units) with a site area of 4,400 ft 3. Figure 11 displays site areas for larger installations of the same units with the maximum system capacity of 24 MW requiring an area of 44,500 ft 3. In a new project in South Korea, a 30 MW PAFC power plant will be built with a two-story structure that will halve the area otherwise required. 3.2 Required Infrastructure Site Considerations Site considerations will vary by fuel cell system and location but generally will require a well-drained area with level ground. Drain lines for water (e.g., ) from the system to a local sewer are usually required. Installation of systems must be in compliance with any federal, state, and local regulatory authorities for building construction regulations and zoning ordinances for issues including system foundation,

38 protection of weather hazards, security enclosure, distance from roads and public ways, etc. Site Area by Capacity for PAFC System Total Site Area (ft 3 ) Total System Capacity (MW) Figure 11: Total site area by capacity for PAFC fuel cell systems. Data from [18] Electrical Infrastructure The deployment of self-generation technologies, including fuel cells, will require consideration of interconnection with the POLB electrical system and ultimately the SCE utility grid, which will require approval from SCE. This is in part because a selfgeneration power system will alter POLB electrical load and the one-way flow of power from SCE to the Port. An engineering review will be necessary to identify any adverse system impacts from fuel cell system interconnection including exceeding the short circuit capability of any breakers, violations of thermal overload or voltage limits, and inadequate grounding requirements and electric system protection. The specific steps required during the interconnection process will be established by SCE. Environmental reviews and permitting, including Harbor Development Permits, will be necessary for installations within the Long Beach Harbor District. Additional items may be required 37

39 by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Major infrastructure upgrades or installation will be dependent on the existing electrical infrastructure and the needs of the fuel cell system. Fuel cells produce direct current (DC) electricity which is then converted by an inverter to alternating current (AC) for most applications including utility interconnection. The sizing of the fuel cell system will require consideration of the strategies and economics associated with POLB energy consumption. If a fuel cell system is desired to provide both baseload and back-up generation, the system would need to be sized to meet the portion of electrical and thermal demand chosen during day-to-day operations. Additionally, sizing considerations would include maintaining critical POLB facility loads during grid outages. This would require both an assessment of year-round POLB energy consumption and loads designated as critical to evaluate the benefits of different system configurations. The judicious deployment of fuel cell systems at POLB will provide an opportunity to establish the ability to island. To achieve this capability, the system will need to be properly sized and configured to effectively insulate the Port from grid failure (i.e., islanding mode). Important considerations for islanding include (1) black start capability, (2) synchronous generators with safeguards to prevent export to the downed grid, (3) appropriate carrying capacity, and (4) parallel utility interconnection and switchgear control. 18 A further consideration for POLB is the availability and participation in programs that can provide financial or other incentives for fuel cell system deployment. One example includes the Self-generation Incentive Program (SGIP) which provides

40 incentive funding for distributed generation projects. Other funding opportunities are emerging associated, for example, with Cap and Trade, short lived climatic pollutants, and the Porter Ranch episode Natural Gas Infrastructure Current fuel cell system installation requires a supply of natural gas and thus interconnection with the POLB natural gas infrastructure which is provided by Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). Two key issues requiring consideration include natural gas availability and natural gas pressure. Availability of required natural gas supply includes both the quantity of natural gas needed for fuel cell operation and required gas lines to provide it. The amount of natural gas required for operation will vary with respect to the size of the system. For example, depending on various factors including operation conditions a 5 MW SOFC installation requires ~30 million British thermal units per hour (MMBTU/hr) natural gas [19], a 2.8 MW MCFC system uses ~20 MMBTU/hr [20], and a 440 kw PAFC system consumes ~ MMBTU/hour [18]. In contrast to heat engines, typical fuel pressures required by fuel cells range from less than 0.5 to 45 pounds per square inch gauge (psig) [5] which generally does not require upgrading from traditional natural gas infrastructure established in commercial buildings. For example, the 440 kw system in Reference [18] requires an inlet pressure of natural gas of psig. The potential need to update natural gas infrastructure to facilitate fuel cell systems, or other self-generation systems, will depend on existing POLB natural gas supply lines and system requirements. Similar to the agreement reached for electricity rates and billing charges with SCE, POLB should seek to establish an agreement with SoCalGas regarding natural gas rates. The cost structure of natural gas distribution is 39

41 similar to electricity but the cost of the infrastructure is generally a smaller ratio of the overall costs for large volume customers [19]. POLB should also consider contacting SoCalGas to provide a natural gas service evaluation for potential new power projects, including a description of the necessary improvements to existing gas infrastructure to support fuel cell project installation and a preliminary estimate of the costs require to construct facilities Hydrogen Infrastructure While current commercial distributed fuel cell systems operate on natural gas and biogas by internally reforming the gas to hydrogen, fuel cells can be supplied with hydrogen directly if and when renewable hydrogen becomes commonplace as a solution to capturing wind energy that would otherwise be curtailed. Thus, while not necessary in the short term, future infrastructure at POLB could include hydrogen pipeline infrastructure. Pipelines are the most efficient mechanism for transportation large amounts of hydrogen. Construction costs for hydrogen pipelines are 10-20% higher than those for natural gas due largely to materials associated with hydrogen embrittlement [21]. On-site hydrogen storage could be beneficial and include high pressure gaseous storage vessels of varying composition (e.g., all-metal cylinder, carbon fiber). Cryogenic liquid storage tanks could be employed to store large quantities of hydrogen. If tri-generation systems are deployed, any produced hydrogen could be stored on-site and used when needed for power or as a transportation fuel. 3.3 Operating and Maintenance Fuel cell operating and maintenance (O&M) requirements are relatively low given the few moving parts associated with fuel cell systems. Short term maintenance

42 include filter changes for the sulfur trap, fuel, and air. Depending on the type of fuel cell, the required changes occur annually (8,766 hours), or 2,000 to 4,000 hours of operation [5]. Similarly, the fuel reformer may require maintenance including replacement of a reformer igniter. Additional maintenance can be required for water treatment beds, flange gaskets, valves, and electrical components. Consumable products also can require replacement including sulfur adsorbent bed catalyst and nitrogen for shutdown purging. Long term O&M considerations include the replacement of the shift and reformer catalysts. Remote monitoring by the manufacturer is used as a vehicle to manage maintenance and detect a requirement for unscheduled maintenance before it becomes an operating issue. Fuel Cell O&M considerations for the POLB will depend on the structure of ownership as many manufacturers offer a range of options including leasing, power purchasing agreements (PPA), and warranties (Discussed further in Section 4). Direct ownership would require the most O&M responsibility for the POLB while a PPA would require the virtually no responsibility. 20 A leasing agreement would typically require the lease (e.g., POLB) to be responsible for the purchase and delivery of fuel with O&M and other costs assumed by the leasing agent. 3.4 Fuel Cell Lifetime Fuel cell operating lifetimes have evolved to achieve and exceed a commercial target of 20 years for the balance of plant, and between 5 and 10 years (depending on the fuel cell type) for the fuel cell stack [5]. Many fuel cell manufacturers provide stack replacement as a part of warranty coverages. Further, for installations using either a PPA or leasing arrangement, manufacturer or developer assumes the responsibility for

43 replacement of system components experiencing failure prior to the agreement deadline. 42

44 4 Fuel Cell Costs Costs for stationary fuel cell systems vary by type and application and include capital cost (equipment and installation), operating and maintenance (O & M) costs, and cost for fuel. Costs for five CCHP fuel cell systems reported in Reference [5] are displayed in Table but should be considered typical pricing (it should be noted that costs for larger SOFC systems (~ kw) are much less expensive than those presented by System 2 but those data were unavailable to the authors). Total costs range from $4,600/kw for a large commercial and industrial application to $23,000/kw for a small residential application, although costs for systems more representative to those for POLB range from $4,600-$10,000. Installed costs range depending on factors such as the scope of plant equipment, geographical deployment area, competitive market condition, existence of specialized site requirements, and current rates of labor [5]. Additionally, incentive programs and other funding opportunities may be available at state and federal levels due to the environmental benefits associated with their use that can make fuel cell costs competitive with other technologies and support their deployment at POLB. Table 5: Estimated Costs for Fuel Cells in CCHP Applications. Adapted from [5]. Installed Cost Components System 1 System 2 System 3 System 4 System 5 Application Residential Residential Com./Ind. Com./Ind. Com./Ind. Fuel Cell Type PEMFC SOFC MCFC PAFC MCFC Capacity (kw) Total Cost (2014 $/kw) $22,000 $23,000 $10,000 $7,000 $4,600 O&M Costs (2014 $/MWh) $60 $55 $45 $36 $40 Real-world costs of fuel cell installation projects are more in line with the lower end of the CCHP systems shown in Table 5 when incentives are available. In California, the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) has led to the deployment of over

45 stationary fuel cell systems operating on renewable biogas and natural gas [22]. The average estimated costs for fuel cells in the SGIP range by capacities from $9,524- $10,932/kW without incentives and $5,587-$8,299/kW with incentives [22]. Generally, systems with larger capacities have lower unit costs and also receive more incentives, further reducing costs. Figure 12 compares unsubsidized levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of different distributed self-generation technologies as well as average prices from the CA utility grid. The LCOE of fuel cells can range from 10.6 to 16.7 cents/kwh unsubsidized and 9.4 to 16.0 cents/kwh with federal tax subsidies [23]. Commercial deployments of fuel cells systems similar to what would be utilized at POLB have been shown to have LCOE of 8-10 cents/kwh to 9-11 cents/kwh with subsidies and cents/kwh without subsidies depending on manufacturer and system [14]. This is reasonably competitive with pricing for grid electricity in markets with relatively high electricity costs including California which can range from cents/kwhr depending on the time of year and end-use sector [24]. Fuel cells operating on natural gas and renewable fuels are also eligible for Federal tax incentives including the Business Energy Investment Tax Credit with a maximum incentive of $1,500 per 0.5 kw 21. While the POLB could not benefit from such incentives, the individual tenants at the Port are eligible. While the costs of fuel cells are high relative to other forms of self-generation, future improvements in technology and manufacturing are expected to significantly reduce them moving forward. Indeed capital costs for fuel cells have steadily declined in recent years. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has established the following targets for stationary fuel cells applicable to POLB which would allow fuel cells to be more competitive economically with other forms of self-generation [25]:

46 Levelized Cost of Electricity Gas Combined Cycle Reciprocating Engine Microturbine Solar PV Avg. CA Utility Grid Fuel Cell $/kwh Figure 12: Unsubsidized levelized cost of electricity for self-generation technologies [23] and average California utility grid [24]. Solar PV pricing represents a range from rooftop commercial and industrial to community-scale deployment. By 2020, develop DG and micro-chp fuel cell systems (5 kw) operating on natural gas that achieve 45% electrical efficiency and 60,000 hours durability at an equipment cost of $1,500/KW By 2020, develop medium-scale combined heat and power (CHP) 22 fuel cell systems (100 kw-3 MW) operating on natural gas that achieve 50% electrical and 90% CHP efficiency, 80,000 hours durability and costs of $1,500/kW operating on natural gas and $2,100/kw operation on biogas. By 2020, develop a fuel cell system for APU (1-10 kw) with a specific power of 45 W/kg, a power density of 40W/L, and cost of $1000/kW. A strategy for procurement of generation and heat from fuel cell systems that has achieved success and may be favorable to POLB includes the establishment of a power purchase agreement (PPA) with a fuel cell manufacturer or provider. A PPA is a contract between an electricity generator (fuel cell manufacturer or other financing party) and consumer (POLB or its tenants) that would allow for no upfront capital 22 CHP is distinct from CCHP in that it does not include space cooling 45

47 investment as the manufacturer or third-party installer is responsible for the cost of the equipment, the cost of installation, and operation and maintenance. Instead, POLB would purchase electricity and heat from fuel cell generation over a period of years, often at favorable rates. Essentially a PPA could allow the POLB to procure generation from fuel cells at the prices that are competitive with the CA utility grid such as 8-11 cents/kwh without high upfront capital costs. The PPA is a common mechanism for attaining financing of alternative energy projects with benefits to POLB including: Budget certainty by pre-defined price of electricity/heat specified for multiyear periods with potentially favorable rates (e.g., 8-15 cents/kwh) System installation with no capital expense for the consumer System design, engineering, permitting, installation, and utility interconnection are handled by installer O & M costs included for contract duration Performance guarantees established in contract Tri-Generation systems are able to achieve substantially lower electricity costs due to the production of a highly-valued revenue stream of hydrogen. 46

48 5 Fuel Cells vs. Other Self-generation Devices 5.1 Self-Generation Devices In addition to fuel cells, self-generation technologies available for distributed applications include reciprocating engines, gas turbines, steam turbines, and microturbines. Furthermore, fuel cells can be integrated with a heat engine in hybrid fuel cell/heat engine plants. These technologies are also suitable for combined cooling, heating, and power applications (CCHP) and can be integrated in microgrids. Similar to fuel cells, the following devices convert chemical energy in fuel into electric power and heat. In contrast to fuel cells, the devices listed require the additional steps of converting hot gases to provide electricity through a series of mechanical devices such as pistons or turbines and an electrical generator whereas fuel cells convert fuel chemical energy into electrical energy electrochemically in one step). The following section briefly describes self-generation devices and compares operational parameters relative to fuel cells for stationary applications at the POLB Reciprocating Engines Reciprocating engines represent a mature and commercially available heat engine technology that make up over half of existing CHP systems in the U.S [5]. Reciprocating engines can operate with either spark ignition or compression ignition and can range from very small (0.005 MW) to large (80 MW) systems, although typical CHP systems sizes range in the MW. Benefits of reciprocating engines include low investment and operating cost, high flexibility, reliability and availability, high part-load efficiencies and load following capabilities, and fast start-up times. Drawbacks of reciprocating engines include the need for regular service due to moving parts, noisy operation, and emissions of criteria pollutants and elevated GHGs which 47

49 can represent hurdles for permitting in regions constrained by poor air quality including the South Coast Air Basin in which POLB is situated Gas Turbines Gas turbines have been used for stationary power generation for many decades and range in size from 500 kw to hundreds of MW. Typically, for CCHP applications, the most economic size range is 5-MW to the hundreds of MW-scale [5]. Gas turbines have higher efficiencies and lower emissions than other common fossil combustion heat engines but require clean-up or control strategies including lean pre-mixed combustion and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to meet permitting requirements. Typically gas turbines as CCHP are best suited for processes with a need for high temperatures (i.e., steam production) [26] Microturbines Microturbines are small (typically 60-1,000 kilowatts) distributed gas turbine power plants that can be combined with a bottoming steam turbine cycle or operated as a stand-alone Brayton cycle. Microturbines and offer the benefits of simple design, compact size, low vibration and noise, and no required cooling [5]. Downsides of microturbines include high costs, low flexibility, and low electrical efficiencies, particularly at part load [26]. Typically, microturbine systems operate on natural gas but can also operate on renewable gaseous fuels but must be integrated with CHP to achieve reductions in GHG, and must be integrated with SCR to achieve low criteria pollutant emissions [5, 27, 28] Steam Turbines Steam turbines are typically matched to solid fuel boilers, industrial waste heat, or integration with a gas turbine as a bottoming cycle to create combined cycles. 48

50 Typical capacities for steam turbines range from 50 kw to several hundred MW in large centralized power plants. Steam turbines benefits include high fuel flexibility, high reliability and equipment lifetime, and flexibility of design Combined Cycle Generation Gas and steam turbines can provide combined cycle (CC) generation comprised of three main components a gas turbine (Brayton cycle that includes compressor, combustor and turbine), a steam turbine (operating on the Rankine cycle), and a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) that integrates the two cycles together by generating steam from the upstream gas turbine exhaust. Combined cycle generation systems can range in capacity from 10 MW to GW-scale has the benefits of high thermal efficiencies, high reliability and availability, low installed and O & M costs, and flexibility of generation. At the central plant scale, natural gas CC plants are capable of high fuel-toelectricity efficiency of between 50-60% and ultra-low criteria pollutant emissions when integrated with a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) emissions clean up system Hybrid Fuel Cell Heat Engine Plants Hybrid fuel cell heat engine plants integrate a high temperature fuel cell (solid oxide or molten carbonate) with a heat engine (e.g., gas turbine, reciprocating engine) to achieve a higher fuel-to-electricity efficiency than a fuel cell alone (converting fuel cell heat to electricity) [29]. A basic schematic is provided in Figure 13. By utilizing synergies between the different technologies, improved performance including higher efficiencies are achieved relative to the fuel cell and heat engine generator alone. These emerging power plants are being developed by several manufacturers and have been shown to achieve very high electrical efficiencies [30-32] with virtually zero criteria pollutant emissions even at distributed power sizes [30], and dynamic dispatch characteristics [31, 33]. 49

51 Figure 13: Basic design concept of a gas turbine fuel cell hybrid power plant. From [30] An overview schematic of a proposed commercial example of a hybrid fuel cell heat engine plant is presented in Figure 12 for the General Electric (GE) fuel cellcombined cycle (FC-CC) technology. The FC-CC comprises a heat and power generation system comprised of a SOFC and a GE Jenbacher reciprocating engine that can operate on natural gas [34]. The synergistic impacts of the FC and reciprocating engine allow for very high efficiencies including electrical efficiencies as high as 60-65% and overall CHP efficiencies as high as 90%. 23 The FC-CC system also has the environmental benefits of ultra-low emissions and a net producer of water. The ability of FC-CC systems to attain these benefits at a distributed scale makes them particularly attractive for stationary power applications from 1 to 10 MW. 23 CHP efficiency is equivalent to both electricity and heat output divided by the heating value of the fuel 50

52 Figure 14: Overview diagram of the GE FC Heat Engine Hybrid Energy System. From [34] 5.2 Self-Generation Technology Comparison Table 6 displays costs, emissions, sizing and performance for the self-generation technologies discussed in this report. The values are compared and contrasted in subsequent sections. 51

53 Table 6: Cost and Performance Parameters for Self-Generation Devices. Data adapted from [5, 34, 35] Fuel Cell & Hybrid Systems Recip. Engine Steam Turbine Gas Turbine Microturbine Electric Efficiency (HHV) 30-65%* 27-41% 5-40% 24-36% 22-28% Net CHP Efficiency (HHV) 55-90%* 77-80% Approx. 80% 66-71% 63-70% Typical Capacity (MW) hundreds Power Density (kw/m 2 ) > Part-load Potential Good OK OK Poor OK CHP Installed Cost ($/kw) 5,000-6,500 1,500-2, ,100 1,200-3,300 2,500-4,300 Non-fuel O&M Cost($/kWh) Availability >95% 96-98% 72-99% 93-96% 98-99% Start-up Period Fuels 15 min - 3 hrs - 2 days (by type) NG, H 2, biogas, propane, methanol 10 seconds 15 min 1 hour - 1 day 2 min - 1 hr 60 sec NG, biogas, LPG, sour gas, industrial waste gas, All NG, biogas, synthetic gas NG, biogas, sour gas, liquid fuels NO x Emissions (g/kwh) *The highest electric and CCHP efficiencies are achieved for FC-CC technologies, HHV: higher heating value 52

54 5.2.1 System Size The range of typical capacities for the self-generation technologies depend on consumer and applications. Commercial fuel cell units range from MW but the modularity of fuel cells allow for larger systems potentially up to the hundreds of MW. For example, a 59 MW fuel cell power plant composed of MW units currently provides clean generation and district heating to a major city in South Korea. 24 Steam turbine and gas turbine capacities can range from several hundred MW depending on application and specific type. Microturbines are inherently small, with typical systems ranging from MW. Reciprocating engines can range from very small to medium size installations ( MW) Emissions Pollutant emissions of concern from self-generation technologies include NOx, SOx, CO, PM, and VOC. GHG emissions include CO2, methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Figure 15 displays emissions of NOx in grams per kilowatt-hour (g/kwhr) for self-generation technologies operating on natural gas. Emissions of NOx from fuel cells are significantly lower (0.004 to g/kwhr) than all other options due to the avoidance of combustion and require no emission control device or strategy [5]. Emissions from NGCC plants can be low (0.014 to 0.11 g/kwhr) but require clean-up with selective catalytic reduction (SCR) strategies to achieve the minimum values indicated in the range. Gas turbine NOx emissions have a large range (0.023 to g/kwhr) but typical commercial systems generate 0.07 to 0.11 g/kwhr with lean premixed burners and the inclusion of SCR can further reduce emissions by 80 to 90% [5]. Microturbines operating on natural gas can achieve low NOx emissions with lean premixed combustion at full load with typical emissions from to g/kwhr [5]

55 However, emissions commonly increase during operation at part load with implications for complementary generation or dynamic operation to support distributed loads. Reciprocating engines have the potential for high emissions, including NOx, depending on the type of engine used. Smaller scale engines utilizing rich burn combustion and catalytic after treatment can emit g/kwhr while larger lean burn systems may emit 0.36 g/kwhr in the absence of SCR. Steam turbine emissions depend directly on fuel choice with natural gas systems ranging from to g/kwhr. Figure 15: Emissions of NO x from Self-generation Technologies Operating on Natural Gas. NGCC: Natural Gas Combined Cycle, GT: Gas Turbine, MT: Microturbine, ST: Steam Turbine. Data for NGCC from [36-38], Data for others from [5]. A key benefit of the very low direct emissions from fuel cells is that systems can be sited in air basins with poor air quality and restrictive permitting processes. This allows for distributed generation applications with benefits including improved reliability, flexibility, economy of scale, avoidance of transmission and distribution losses, and others. This has importance to POLB applications as the Port is situated in the South Coast Air Basin which experiences some of the worst air quality in the U.S. and therefore has stringent pollutant emission regulations required for stationary 54

56 sources. Other self-generation technologies can meet the regulations but require additional costly pollutant control strategies, e.g., SCR, CO oxidation. Emissions of CO2 similarly vary across self-generation technology systems operating on natural gas. Figure 16 shows the generation emissions (i.e., not including CCHP) for considered systems with the exception of steam turbines due to a lack of available data. Overall, fuel cells have the lowest emissions due to higher efficiencies and lack of combustion. Combustion devices range depending on multiple factors but generally NGCC plants have the lowest emissions followed by reciprocating engines and gas turbines. Microturbines have a large range that include It should be noted that inclusion of CCHP will significantly reduce emissions for all systems with combustion devices having more uniformity due to the factors discussed for efficiencies. Figure 16: Emissions of CO 2 from Self-generation Technologies Operating on Natural Gas. NGCC: Natural Gas Combined Cycle, GT: Gas Turbine, MT: Microturbine, ST: Steam Turbine. Data for NGCC from [36-38], Data for others from [5]. 55

57 5.3 Advantages/Disadvantages of Self Generation Devices Technology Advantages Disadvantages Fuel Cells Gas Turbines Steam Turbines Microturbines Recip. Engines Very low emissions of pollutants and GHG with no control needed Very low to net-neutral water consumption Highest efficiency over load range Very little noise Modular, scalable Good load following capability Good part-load operation High reliability Low emissions with control strategies High heat quality No cooling required Reliable Long operational life Variable power to heat ratio Fuel flexible Small number of moving parts Compact size, light weight Potential for low emissions High power efficiency Part-load flexibility Rapid start-up Low investment cost Able to load-follow Can operate on low-pressure gas High unsubsidized cost Low power densities Some systems can have longer start up periods Can be sensitive to fuel impurities Require high pressure gas or compressor Poor efficiency at part-load Sensitive to ambient temperature Slow start-up Very low power to heat ratio Requires boiler or other steam source High costs Relatively low efficiencies Low temperature CCHP Requires emission cleanup (e.g., SCR) CCHP limited by low temperature High emissions of pollutants and GHG Noisy High O & M costs 56

58 6 CCHP at POLB 6.1 Benefits of CCHP Combined cooling, heating, and power (CCHP) represents an affordable solution to entities such as POLB seeking to address the challenges associated with rising energy costs and demand pressures in tandem with improving efficiencies and reducing environmental impacts. CCHP is a proven and mature technology with an established history in the U.S. and increasing installed capacities due to various energy and environmental drivers [39]. CCHP is a clean and efficient approach to meeting distributed electrical and thermal loads at POLB including providing space/process cooling capacity in addition to space/process heating and steam generation. In contrast to most other applications, marine terminals have relatively small thermal loads compared with their overall power usage, and novel systems would likely be required to facilitate and utilize CCHP benefits. CCHP systems involve a primary driver (e.g., fuel cell, reciprocating engine, turbine and micro-turbine) that is installed at/or near the user to allow for the waste heat from electricity generation to be collected and used to meet thermal demands [40]. Because this allows for useful work to be done by the heat that would otherwise be exhausted, the direct benefits of CCHP relative to using the devices alone include reduced energy costs and emissions and increased reliability and energy efficiencies. An additional efficiency benefit of CCHP is the avoidance of transmission and distribution losses as electricity is generated on-site. Potential additional benefits of CCHP include increased reliability and support for the electric grid and minimization of the need for new construction of transmission and distribution technologies [5]. The use of natural gas based CCHP systems to provide complementary generation would provide a highly efficient and low-emitting method for providing the flexible and fast- 57

59 ramping generation needed to complement renewable integration particularly if fuel cells are used as the primary driver. Often the largest barriers to CCHP are policy related including energy policies, although California has a more favorable system than other States. Challenges can include confusing or inconsistent permitting requirements, lack of interconnection standards, unfavorable economics including charge fees, standby rates and exit fees, and others [39]. Table 7: Direct and Associated Benefits of CCHP Direct Benefits of CCHP Reduced energy expenditures via direct cost savings Increased economic competitiveness via reduced operating costs and others Increased reliability and resiliency Additional Benefits of CCHP Increased energy efficiency and reduce overall energy consumption Reduced criteria pollutant emissions Reduced GHG emissions Provide economic development value Resource adequacy Increased reliability and grid support for utility system Increase the competitiveness of business Reduce need for infrastructure improvements While a range of costs and benefits exists for CCHP systems relative to the utility grid and other self-generation systems, three in particular are chosen and discussed in more detail due to their importance to the POLB. They include (1) significant improvements in economics, and (2) potential reductions in pollutant and GHG emissions, and (3) increased reliability and resiliency of energy supply. It should be noted that efficiency gains are a large benefit of CCHP but are discussed in a standalone section in this report. 58

60 6.1.1 Economic Benefits The use of CCHP can potentially reduce energy costs due largely in part to its high efficiencies, translating to reductions in fuel costs and electricity purchases. This can also be beneficial by reducing the potential impact of electricity rate increases and by allowing POLB to generate its own electricity during periods of peak electricity costs. The fuel flexibility of most self-generation technologies, including fuel cells, provides a hedge against fluctuations in fuel prices (natural gas is currently abundant and affordable but could experience price increase in the future). Financial incentives designed to encourage the use of CCHP in California may also be available and reduce costs further. Additionally, some capital costs associated with heating and/or cooling may be avoided (e.g., cost for boilers and chillers) although this would need to be balanced relative to the capital cost of the system. A major economic benefit of CCHP technology is the protection of POLB revenue streams, namely the successful transport of goods. As previously discussed, even brief disruptions in POLB activities incur a massive financial penalty to the Port and the economies of southern California and the U.S. By installing CCHP self-generation the POLB will reduce the risk of operational interruption via disruption of grid electricity service which minimizes financial losses. However, in order for POLB to determine how CCHP will impact energy-related costs it will be necessary to establish the cost of the technology including installation, fuel, operation, and maintenance and compare the final price of electricity with current SCE rate structures. For example, the up-front capital cost to install CCHP or replace an existing boiler must be considered. Moreover, any additional costs associated with meeting the goals of the system should be accounted for such as those to enable islanding and/or black start capability. This will allow a determination to be made if CCHP is worthwhile investment solely on the basis of economics (i.e., the additional benefits of CCHP may make it desirable to POLB anyway, including reduced emissions 59

61 and increased resiliency and reliability). A major determinant of cost includes the value of produced thermal energy and for POLB to maximize benefits and minimize costs a beneficial use should be identified CCHP Emissions The use of CCHP technologies provides direct reductions in emissions of pollutants and GHG emissions simply because less fuel is consumed to provide a unit of energy output for a given system. Additionally, reductions in emissions are achieved through avoided activity including the construction of new transmission and distribution infrastructure. However, reductions in emissions must also be considered in the context of where the emissions occur. Currently, the POLB receives its electricity from the SCE utility grid with the actual sites of generation and the associated emissions occurring off-site and not on POLB property. By replacing grid electricity with generation from on-site distributed technologies, emissions will introduced at POLB, even though the total emissions per unit energy is potentially lower compared to the grid. This will require the system to be permitted by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) prior to operation. Fuel cells provide a pathway to self-generation at POLB to reduce overall emissions and avoid issues with the situation of new emissions sources within the Port. Other technologies can provide selfgeneration with emission levels at acceptable permitting levels; however these may require expensive controls and/or clean-up strategies. Additionally, POLB is especially constrained by emissions due to the high levels of emissions from existing port activity and stringent environmental regulations being imposed on the Port. Thus, fuel cells represent the lowest emitting self-generation technology that can capture the benefits of CCHP. 60

62 6.1.3 Improved Reliability and Resiliency By providing electricity and meeting thermal loads on-site the POLB can attain the benefits of increased resiliency and reliability of its energy supply. By having onsite generation POLB will reduce its reliance on the existing SCE utility grid and experience of disruption from grid outages. CCHP systems can function flexibly both as primary generation during periods of normal operation and as back-up generation during outages including operation during grid-connected and islanding periods. CCHP systems can use a variety of fuels and many systems have very high reliabilities. 6.2 Opportunities for CCHP at POLB As described above, CCHP can provide significant energy, efficiency, economic, and environmental benefits but only if a chosen system is a suitable match for a given entity both technically and economically [41]. The technical potential for CCHP at POLB is determined by the coincident demand for electricity and thermal energy including steam, hot water, chilled water, process heat, refrigeration, and dehumidification [41]. The economic suitability for CCHP at POLB is established by current and future fuel costs and utility rates, planned new construction or heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment replacement, the need for power reliability, and various programs including utility policies [41]. The POLB is somewhat unique relative to other commonly considered CCHP targets such as commercial office buildings, groceries, hospitals, laundries, etc. Generally, applications with continuous or fixed needs for both electricity and thermal energy represent optimal CCHP targets from an economic perspective. POLB has a very large, fixed electrical load which it requires 24/7. By providing a significant portion of this load with CCHP enabled technologies a substantial thermal load would also be generated, captured and available for use. However, operations at the POLB 61

63 driving electricity demands do not necessarily correspond directly on-site with the large available thermal loads that would then be co-available. For example, the large ship-toshore cranes operating at container terminals require large amounts of electricity but may not be directly adjacent a source for the co-generated thermal energy. A benefit of fuel cells at POLB may then be that the economics of CCHP for fuel cells depend less on the effective use of recovered thermal energy than for other, less electrically efficient self-generation technologies. Essentially electric only efficiency would become a much more important factor if some or all of the available thermal loads are not converted into useful work Space Cooling/Heating Thermal loads from CCHP systems can provide hot water, space heating and/or cooling via an absorption chiller to buildings at POLB, including commercial office buildings housing POLB employees and operations. This would offset electricity and natural gas currently being used to maintain comfortable building environments for POLB and terminal operator staff. Potential challenges include the mismatch of needed thermal load with electricity load (i.e., buildings would consume a relatively small amount of thermal energy compared to electricity generated) if larger systems are deployed. An additional target for the utilization of waste heat could be to support the handling and storage of refrigerated cargo. It is possible that absorption chilling from CCHP technologies could be used to assist in maintaining chilled temperatures for produce and other cargo requiring refrigeration. This would likely require the construction of a facility on-site to house refrigerated cargo or perhaps the development of a novel technology or strategy for refrigerated cargo that can utilize cold air or water to reduce the amount of electricity required to maintain the container temperature. 62

64 Such a system could also potentially be integrated a thermal energy storage that could provide energy and economic benefits to POLB microgrid. For example, a thermal energy storage system designed to around chilled water could allow for peak shifting which would contribute to reduced energy costs and improved efficiencies Industrial Applications POLB is located adjacent to areas of industry including large refinery complexes which may be a potential target for heat or steam produced by self-generation CCHP systems. The CCHP demands from refineries could potentially be a good match for the electricity generated at POLB as both can operate 24/7 and the magnitude of required thermal energy would be comparable to generated electricity. Potential industries include energy intensive segments such as chemical manufacturing, refining, paper/pulp, food processing and primary metals. Large refineries typically have large process steam requirements and could provide a source for steam generated at POLB and transported via pipeline or other methods. 63

65 7 Self-generation and CCHP Efficiencies The following section will briefly describe different efficiency measures for selfgeneration and CCHP technologies and compare and contrast reported values for each. Understanding the efficiencies of self-generation and CCHP technologies requires an understanding of how efficiencies are calculated. Efficiency of generation is a ratio between the useful output of conversion (electricity) and the energy input (fuel). Typically, efficiency of electricity generators is inversely proportional to the heat generated as heat is energy from the fuel that is lost to the environment. However, in CCHP devices heat is captured and then utilized for useful output (space heating/cooling, steam generation). Thus, assessing the efficiency of CCHP devices requires consideration of both electricity and thermal outputs in relation to fuel inputs. Figure 17 displays an overview and comparison of the efficiencies from conventional and CHP systems from Reference [42]. The numbers present in the arrows represent unit energy, e.g., for CHP 100 units of energy in as fuel provide 31 units of electricity and 52 units of heat. As can be seen, to provide the same net electricity and thermal loads as a 5 MW NG combustion turbine CHP system, a conventional power plant at 30% efficiency and a conventional boiler at 80% efficiency would require an additional 68 units of fuel input. This results in net system efficiencies of 49% for conventional generation and 83% for CHP and highlights the efficiency benefits of distributed CHP generation. 64

66 Figure 17: Overview and Comparison of Efficiencies from Conventional and CCHP Generation. From [42]. 7.1 Electrical Efficiencies Electric efficiencies overlap in range between technologies and also depend on the size of the installation as larger installations are commonly more efficient than smaller installations for the same technology. Table 8 displays the electrical efficiencies of the self-generation technologies considered in this work. Generally, the highest electric efficiencies are attributed to fuel cells (30-63%) due to the operational parameters discussed in Section 1, including the FC CC system which can achieve the highest electric efficiency of 65% [5, 34]. Combined cycle applications involving only natural gas turbines also achieve very high efficiencies in the 40-50% range. Electric efficiencies of additional technologies in descending order include large reciprocating engines (27-41%), simple cycle gas turbines (24-36%), microturbines (22-28%), and steam turbines (5-40+%) [5]. 65

67 7.2 CCHP Efficiency As discussed, the CCHP efficiency of self-generation is much higher than electricity only efficiencies due to the ability to capture and utilize otherwise wasted thermal energy. This is particularly important for devices that have lower electric efficiencies (e.g., microturbines, gas turbines) as the utilization of heat from inefficiencies increases the overall efficiencies of the system to better compare with higher electric only efficiency devices (e.g., fuel cells, combined cycle, large reciprocating engines). Therefore, the total CCHP efficiency is generally calculated accounting for the energy content of electricity and useful thermal energy divided by the higher heating value (HHV) of the fuel consumed. Net (or CCHP) system efficiencies of CCHP technologies experience greater consistency due to nature of CCHP heat generated during electric conversion inefficiencies is captured and used for thermal loads. As CCHP efficiency is equivalent to the net electricity plus the net useful thermal output divided by the consumed fuel this results in higher efficiencies for less electrically efficient technologies. Table 8 displays the CCHP efficiencies for the self-generation devices considered in this work. FC-CC systems achieve the highest potential CCHP efficiency around 90% while fuel cell systems alone range from 55-80%. Reciprocating engines and steam turbines also can achieve around 80% system efficiency while gas turbines and microturbines are around 70%. However, the value of electrical output could be higher than thermal output at POLB due to smaller thermal loads relative to electrical loads. To better account for this an additional definition of CCHP efficiency is effective electrical efficiency or fuel utilization effectiveness (FUE). FUE expresses CCHP efficiency by comparing net electrical generation relative to net fuel consumption with the portion of fuel that goes 66

68 to useful heat excluded [5]. By using FUE a direct comparison can be made of CCHP generation relative to each other. Table 8 displays the FUE for the self-generation technologies described in this work. FUE are highest for fuel cells ranging from 55-80% and reciprocating engines ranging from 75-80% [5]. Steam turbine FUE are also high from 75-77% while FUE for gas turbines and microturbines are lower ranging from 50-62% and 49-57%, respectively. Table 8: Various efficiency measures for self-generation and CCHP technologies. Technology Fuel Recip. Steam Gas Cell Engine Turbine Turbine Electric Efficiency (HHV) 30-63% 27-41% 5-40% 24-36% 22-28% Net CCHP Efficiency (HHV) 55-90% 77-80% ~80% 66-71% 63-70% Fuel Utilization Effectiveness 55-90% 75-80% 75-77% 50-62% 49-57% Microturbine 67

69 8 Power-to-Gas at POLB 8.1 Power-to-Gas Overview Power-to-gas (P2G) is a technology strategy that involves the conversion of electricity into a gaseous fuel (an overview is shown in Figure 18). Generally, the produced gaseous fuel is hydrogen, although hydrogen can be combined with CO2 and converted to methane. Most often however, P2G is associated with the use of electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen by electrolysis which can then be used on- or off-site in transportation, power generation, or industrial applications. Hydrogen can be directly fed into a fuel cell for both stationary power and motive applications either on- or off-site (when P2G strategies return power to the grid they are often termed Power-to-Gas-to-Power). All P2G strategies can also have the end-result of injecting the produced gas into the existing natural gas system which can be stored and transmitted for additional uses. While still an area of active research, hydrogen can be injected safely into the existing gas grid potentially at levels from 5-20% by volume [43]. P2G is particularly attractive from an environmental and energy benefits perspective when the source of electricity is renewable notably the excess generation from wind or solar resources. By converting surplus renewable generation into hydrogen, P2G provides an effective manner of capturing renewable energy that would otherwise be wasted and making it available for use at later times in various applications by both storing and transporting hydrogen. P2G systems can respond rapidly and dynamically to renewable fluctuations, can be sited unrestricted to a geologic formation, and are scalable with similarity to a fuel cell. Additionally, P2G can provide energy storage at the seasonal scale (i.e., terawatt range) by using the existing natural gas pipelines and underground storage facilities. Several grid services can be provided by P2G strategies including [43]: 68

70 Figure 18: Overview of P2G Concept. From [43] Time shifting of energy (e.g., to better match renewable resource availability with demand) Voltage and frequency regulation Ramping System Capacity Rapid demand and supply response Avoided investment in novel transmission and distribution infrastructure However, as all conversion processes are associated with energy losses the P2G chain results in less energy being available at the end than was initially provided in the electricity. Figure 19 displays the process efficiency for current electrolysis technologies delivering hydrogen at 25 bar with an electrical efficiency of 70% and a methanation reactor operated at 20 bar with an efficiency of 78% representing the maximum chemical efficiency [44]. Therefore, for every unit of electricity input into the system 70% of the energy is available as hydrogen or 55% as methane. If the supply of electricity is renewable energy that would be curtailed or otherwise not utilized than 69

71 this efficiency loss is acceptable. On the other hand, if grid electricity or electricity from fossil sources is used to produce gaseous fuels then the loss of energy associated with each conversion step limits the effectiveness of P2G. Efficiency losses incurred by the system results in the application of P2G with grid electricity achieving efficiency and emissions dis-benefits relative to the power from the SCE grid (i.e., the use of electricity directly has lower emissions on a per unit energy basis than using the gaseous fuels produced as a result of P2G systems). Figure 19: P2G Process Efficiency Diagram. From [44]. 8.2 Power-to-Gas at POLB Due to the increase in emissions relative to the California electrical grid, P2G strategies should be avoided at POLB in favor of directly utilizing grid electricity unless on-site supplies of excess renewable resources are available. Therefore, a key limitation associated with P2G at POLB is the lack of on-site renewable generation necessary to provide emission reductions from the displacement of grid electricity. While expansion of renewable resources including solar photovoltaic and wind is possible in the future, it has been cited as being too costly and area intensive to facilitate large capacity additions at POLB [6]. Therefore, on-site P2G systems at POLB may not be feasible from an environmental standpoint if emission reductions are targeted (e.g., it would be a lower emitting strategy to use electrified technologies with grid electricity). However, future application of large-scale P2G systems in California may provide a market-based 70